Will the Body of Christ Go Through the Tribulation? [MUST READ]

[nChrist]

The Seventy Weeks of Daniel - Part X - Page 3 of 3
by Thomas Ice

Conclusion

It is obvious that these events of verse 27 did not take place at or in conjunction with Christ’s first coming in the first century a.d.  A gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth week is needed because it is what the text intended to make this prophecy work out in history with the exact precision that our Lord intends.  It is a shame that some let theological bias prevent them from seeing this, and many other passages, as God intended them when He revealed them to His prophets.  No other approach works and when one takes the final week of years literally then this harmonizes with hundreds of other verses that speak of the tribulation period that will lead up to the defeat of Christ’s enemies and the victory of our Lord.  Hopefully these events are just on the horizon.  Maranatha!

Endnotes

1. John C. Whitcomb, Daniel (Chicago:  Moody Press, 1985), pp. 133-34.

2. Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness:  Obsession of the Modern Church, (Power Springs, GA:  American Vision, 1999), pp. 334-35.

3. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Perilous Times:  A Study in Eschatological Evil (Texarkana, AR:  Covenant Media Press, 1999), pp. 31-33.

4. Gentry, Perilous Times, p. 33.

5. DeMar, Last Days Madness, pp. 334-35.

6. J. Dwight Pentecost, “Daniel,” in John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, The Bible Knowledge Commentary:  Old Testament (Wheaton:  Victor Books, 1985), p. 1365.

7. Robert H. Gundry, The Church and The Tribulation (Grand Rapids:  Zondervan, 1973), p. 191.

8. DeMar, Last Days Madness, p. 101.

9. Randall Price, Prophecy of Daniel 9:27 (San Marcos, TX:  World of the Bible, n.d.), pp. 24-25.

(To Be Continued . . .)

[nChrist]

The Seventy Weeks of Daniel - Part XI - Page 1 of 3
by Thomas Ice

My previous installment concluded the textual examination of Daniel 9:24-27.  However, there are still other issues to deal with in relation to the passage and the postponement of the seventieth week from the first sixty-nine.  These final articles will deal will a few concluding issues.

Critics of a Time Gap

Those who do not think that the seventy weeks of Daniel 9:24-27 have a literal and chronologically precise fulfillment are opposed to the postponement of the seventieth week as a yet future time of seven years.  Examples of such criticism can be found by those within the Reconstructionist movement, holding to a form of preterist postmillennialism.  Gary DeMar complains:

Placing a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel 9:24-27 “must be fixed” because of the system created by dispensationalists, not because the Bible mentions anything about a gap. . . . dispensationalists force the Bible to comply to an already developed system that insists that these events cannot be describing first-century events.1

Fellow preterist, Dr. Ken Gentry echoes DeMar’s refrain in the following:

An overriding concern of the prophecy, in distinction to all other Messianic prophecies is that it is specifically designed to be a measuring time-frame. . . . If there were gaps between the units, the whole idea of measurement in the “seventy weeks” would vanish.  An elastic yardstick is a worthless measure.  None of the other prophecies brought forward as illustrations of a gap claim to be a measure of time.2

Dr. Gentry is right about one thing, that the Daniel 9 passage is the only Messianic prophecy that specifically deals with chronology or the time element.  While I believe that I have shown that the passage itself requires a chronological postponement between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years, it is also supported by other Messianic passages which are not specifically time oriented, but clearly do refer to distinct time-periods:  Christ’s first coming and his second coming.

If anyone believes in the two comings of Christ, and both DeMar and Gentry do, then they also believe in a gap of time between the first and second coming of Christ.  I want to show how this fits into a clear biblical pattern that in turn lends support to the notion of a gap of time in Daniel 9:24-27.

The Two Phases of Christ’s Career

It is obvious from the Bible that if you view the ministry or career of Christ in its entirety, then it is composed of two parts or phases.  The first phase encompasses the first coming of Jesus two thousand years ago, while the second phase will consist of His second coming some time in the future.  Yet many Old Testament prophecies of the coming Messiah commingled their descriptions of both phases of Christ into a single passage, without distinguishing between the two comings or phases of His earthly career.

It is commonly understood today that the Jews of the first century did not understand that these Old Testament prophecies spoke of a single Messiah who would come twice - once in humiliation, then again in glorious exaltation.  We have learned that many Jews of Christ’s day thought that there would be two different Messiahs - Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David.  Messiah ben Joseph would be one who suffers and dies, but is immediately followed by Messiah ben David, who reigns in glory.3  The reality of Scripture is that there is but one Messiah - Jesus of Nazareth - who comes twice.  This means that there is a gap of time between the two comings.

Even though preterists like DeMar and Gentry belittle a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel 9:24-27, they are driven to believe in a gap of time between the two comings.  DeMar and Gentry even believe in a gap, so far, of almost 2,000 years.  Yet this time-gap is not explicitly stated in Scripture.  So how can DeMar and Gentry hold to something like a gap of time that not explicitly stated in Scripture?  Because the only possible implication that can be deduced from the facts of Christ’s two comings is that there is a time-gap between the two events.  In like manner, such a time-gap must also follow from the fact that Christ has a career that is two-phased.
_____________________________________

[nChrist]

The Seventy Weeks of Daniel - Part XI - Page 2 of 3
by Thomas Ice

Why is this important to our study of the seventy weeks of Daniel?  It is important, because as Gentry noted above, “An overriding concern of the prophecy, in distinction to all other Messianic prophecies is that it is specifically designed to be a measuring time-frame.”4  True, so true, Dr. Gentry.  Yet, you believe in a gap of time between the two comings of Christ, even though it is not specifically stated in the Bible.  In the same way, I would argue that all other Messianic passages that speak of the two aspects or phases of the career of Messiah also must imply that they are fulfilled at the two comings of Christ, . . . with a gap of time in between.  This means that there are many similar passages that speak in a single statement of items that encompass both phases of Christ’s career - the first and second advents.  However, as Dr. Gentry has noted, only the Daniel 9:24-27 passage deals specifically with measuring time.  This explains why the Daniel passage is the only Messianic text that deals specifically with a time frame.  However, a significant number of other Messianic passages have something in common with the prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27.  They all speak of components of Christ’s career that will take place in the two phases of His two advents.  Only the Daniel text speaks of time factors.

Two-Phased Messianic Passages

This means that it is legitimate to argue for a gap of time from the other Messianic passages that also include, in a single passage, the two elements of Christ’s career.  Dr. Randall Price makes note of the way Scripture uses time gaps and provides a list of passages that fit into this category in the following statement:

The revelation of a prophetic postponement in the fulfillment of the eschatological aspect of the messianic program is in harmony with numerous passages in the Old Testament that reveal the two advents of Christ (e.g. Gen. 49:10-12; Deut. 18:16; 2 Sam. 7:13-16; Isa. 9:1-7; 11:1-2, 11; 52:13 - 59:21; 61:1-11, cf. Luke 4:16-19; 7:22; Joel 2:28, cf. Acts 2:17; Zeph. 2:13 - 3:20; Zech. 9:9-10; Mic. 5:2-15; Ps. 2:7-8, cf. Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5; Ps. 22:1-32; 34:14, 16; Mal. 3:1-3; 4:5-6; 53:10-11).5

Perhaps the most well-known example of the kind of prophecy about which I speak is found in Christ’s reading of Isaiah 61:1-2 as recorded in Luke 4:16-30.  The passage reads as follows:

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the afflicted; He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to captives, and freedom to prisoners; to proclaim the favorable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn,

Tim LaHaye and I have a chart diagramming this passage in our new book called Charting the End Times.6  We say concerning this passage:

Now when Jesus read the prophecies about Himself in Isaiah 61, why did He stop at the beginning of verse 2?  Because He was announcing the reasons for His first coming and because He was to “proclaim the acceptable year of Jehovah’s favor” (kjv).  That’s a reference to the church age, often called the age of grace, a time when sinners can freely call on the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13).  Jesus stopped at the words, “and the day of vengeance of our God,” which speaks of the Tribulation period, mentioned by the Hebrew prophets as “the day of wrath” and “the time of Jacob’s trouble,” and by Jeremiah as “a day of vengeance” (46:10).  That’s because the purpose of His first coming was to announce the period of grace and salvation we are living in, not the time of judgment that is yet to come.7

Another example of what some have called “double reference” is found in Zechariah 9:9-10.  Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum says concerning double reference:

This rule should not be confused with another rule often called Double Fulfillment.  This author does not accept the validity of the principle of double fulfillment.  This law states that one passage may have a near and a far view; hence, in a way, it may be fulfilled twice. . . . This author, however, does not believe that there is such a thing as double fulfillment.  A single passage can refer to one thing only, and if it is prophecy, it can have only one fulfillment unless the text itself states that it can have many fulfillments.  The law of double reference differs from the law of double fulfillment in that the former states that while two events are blended into one picture, one part of the passage refers to one event and the other part of the passage to the second event.  This is the case in Zechariah 9;9-10.8

In the same context we see that verse nine refers to Christ’s first coming:

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion!  Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem!  Behold, your king is coming to you; He is just and endowed with salvation, humble, and mounted on a donkey, even on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

Verse ten is a reference only to Christ’s second coming as follows:

And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem; and the bow of war will be cut off.  And He will speak peace to the nations; and His dominion will be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth.

In the Zechariah passage, there has to be a gap of time between the fulfillment of the verse nine that relates to Messiah’s first coming two thousand years ago, and His second advent, which is still a yet future event.  Even though no time factor is explicitly stated in the text, because of the specific nature of the events described in the two verses, a gap of time is required to coordinate the fulfillment of this prophecy with the events of history.
_______________________________

[nChrist]

The Seventy Weeks of Daniel - Part XI - Page 3 of 3
by Thomas Ice

Conclusion

The point that I am making in this article, relating to the seventy weeks of Daniel prophecy, is that it is not unreasonable to find implied time gaps in a significant number of Messianic passages in the Old Testament.  I am not saying that this proves that there is in fact a gap in Daniel 9:24-27, I believe that I have demonstrated that in the earlier installments in this series.  I think that this article demonstrates that it is not unreasonable to expect a Messianic passage that requires a time-gap between the fulfillment of all events prophesied in that passage.  This supports our literal interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27.  Maranatha!

Endnotes

1. Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness:  Obsession of the Modern Church, (Power Springs, GA:  American Vision, 1999), p. 333.

2. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Perilous Times:  A Study in Eschatological Evil (Texarkana, AR:  Covenant Media Press, 1999), pp. 29-30.

3. Raphael Patai, The Messiah Texts (Detroit:  Wayne State University Press, 1979), pp. xxxii-xxxv.

4. Gentry, Perilous Times, p. 29.

5. J. Randall Price, “Daniel’s Seventy Weeks, Dispensational Interpretation,” in Mal Couch, ed., Dictionary of Premillennial Theology (Grand Rapids:  Kregel Publications, 1996), p. 77.

6. Tim LaHaye & Thomas Ice, Charting The End Times:  A Visual Guide to Understanding Bible Prophecy (Eugene, OR:  Harvest House Publishers, 2001), pp. 28-30.

7. LaHaye & Ice, Charting The End Times, p. 30.

8. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, The Footsteps of the Messiah:  A Study of the Sequence of Prophetic Events, (Tustin, CA:  Ariel Ministries Press, 1982), pp. 4-5.

(To Be Continued . . .)

[nChrist]

The Seventy Weeks of Daniel - Part XII - Page 1 of 3
by Thomas Ice

In this final installment on the seventy weeks of Daniel, I want to deal with the history of the church’s interpretation of it.  What has the church believed about this passage down through the years.  One of the main reasons for spending time on this matter is that some have said that our view that sees a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel is a recent development in church history.  Truth of the matter is that it is the oldest known view in church history.  Read on and see.

Recent Development Charges

Over the last few years, I have come to expect outburst against all aspects of the literal interpretation of Scripture from preterists who believe that Bible prophecy is a think of the past.  They come through in predicable fashion concerning this issue of the historical interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27.

Gary DeMar is perhaps the most strident on this issue when he says, “nearly all Bible scholars agree that the first sixty-nine weeks of Daniel’s prophecy refer to the time up to Jesus’ crucifixion, only dispensationalists believe that the entire seventieth week is yet to be fulfilled.”1  In a later edition of the same book, DeMar asserts concerning a non-gap view that it “has been the standard interpretation for centuries, except for minor differences in details.  John Nelson Darby and other changed all this with their church-parenthesis hypothesis.”2  After the first sentence of DeMar’s statement, he footnotes a reference to an errant source on the matter, Philip Mauro, who declares the following:  “Nor, so far as we are aware, was any other meaning ever put upon them until within recent years, and then only by those belonging to a particular ‘school’ of interpretation.”3  Of course, Mauro’s recent “school” is reference to those of us who see a future seventieth week in Daniel’s prophecy.  Mauro certainly was not aware of what was taught in the early church, as we shall shortly see.

Preterist, Dr. Kenneth Gentry, speaking of his non-gap interpretation insists that “Conservative scholars widely agree on such an interpretation, which is virtually ‘universal among Christian exegetes’ - excluding dispensationalists.”4  Later, Dr. Gentry continues his inaccurate statements by saying “that the early Father held to a non-eschatological interpretation of the Seventieth Week.”5  This is just not true, as shall be noted below.  Now I will examine just what the early church did believe about the seventy weeks of Daniel.

Early Church Views

The main point for which I am looking into the early church view of Daniel’s seventy weeks prophecy is whether they held to a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.  Interestingly, an article of note was done on this subject, published in a Reformed Journal, which is the general theological orbit of Gary DeMar and Dr. Kenneth Gentry.  The article was written by Louis E. Knowles6 and referenced errantly by Dr. Gentry when he said, “that the early Father held to a non-eschatological interpretation of the Seventieth Week.”7  Dr. Gentry’s statement is clearly in error when compared with the writings of the early church fathers.

The earliest extant writings of the church fathers reveal just the opposite of Dr. Gentry’s claim, with the exception of The Epistle of Barnabas (about a. d. 90-100), which presents a short and incomplete treatment on the subject.  Knowles divides the early church (Barnabas through Augustine) into two interpretive groups, “the eschatological and the historical.”8  By eschatological, Knowles refers to those who took the seventieth week of Daniel as future prophecy leading up to Christ’s return.  By historical, he means those who believe that Daniel’s final week has already been fulfilled.  Knowles concludes that Barnabas “envisioned the completion of all the weeks before the development of the church.”9

When Knowles deals with the next major contributors - Irenaeus (130-200) and his disciple Hippolytus (170-236) - he describes their views as “undoubtedly the forerunners of the modern dispensational interpreters of the Seventy Weeks.”10  Knowles draws the following conclusion about Irenaeus and Hippolytus:

. . . we may say that Irenaeus presented the seed of an idea that found its full growth in the writings of Hippolytus.  In the works of these fathers, we can find most of the basic concepts of the modern futuristic view of the seventieth week of Daniel ix.  That they were dependent to some extent upon earlier material is no doubt true.  Certainly we can see the influence of pre-Christian Jewish exegesis at times, but, by and large, we must regard them as the founders of a school of interpretation, and in this lies their significance for the history of exegesis.11

Thus, it is clear “that in Irenaeus and Hippolytus we have the originators of that method of interpretation that places the seventieth week of Daniel at the time of the consummation.”12
_________________________________

[nChrist]

The Seventy Weeks of Daniel - Part XII - Page 2 of 3
by Thomas Ice

Although, Irenaeus does not explicitly spell out a gap in his writings, there is no other way that he could have come up with his view of a future tribulation period of at least at least three and a half years.13  Irenaeus speaks of how “three years and six months constitute the half-week” in his section on the prophecy of Daniel 9.14  This is why Knowles says that in Irenaeus “we have the basic concept for a futuristic construction of the Seventy Weeks, viz., the position of the last week at the end of the age.”15  Hippolytus, Irenaeus’ pupil is even clearer.

Hippolytus is the first known person in the history of the church to write a commentary on any book of the Bible, and he wrote on Daniel.16  “Hippolytus give us the first attempt at detailed interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” observes Knowles.  “He is dependent, no doubt, upon Irenaeus for the foundational proposition that the last half-week of the seventy is to be connected with the Antichrist, but the detailed development is not found in Irenaeus.”17  In fact, Hippolytus refers to a gap or, in his words “division,” multiple times.18  Hippolytus says,

For when the threescore and two weeks are fulfilled, and Christ is come, and the Gospel is preached in every place, the times being then accomplished, there will remain only one week, the last, in which Elias will appear, and Enoch, and in the midst of it the abomination of desolation will be manifested, viz., Antichrist, announcing desolation to the world.19

Le Roy Froom grudgingly admits that “Hippolytus . . . arbitrarily separates by a chronological gap from the preceding sixty-nine weeks, placing it just before the end of the world.”20  “Certainly Hippolytus’ interpretation does not have the refinements of the later development, but it is the direct ancestor of it,”21 concludes Knowles.

Other Views

There were a number of others in the early church, up till the time of Augustine (354-430), who spoke about the subject of the seventy weeks prophecy found in Daniel 9.  Jerome (340–420) in his commentary on Daniel is reluctant to set forth his own interpretation of Daniel’s seventy weeks prophecy, “because it is unsafe to pass judgment upon the opinions of the great teachers of the Church and to set one above another.”22  So Jerome simply records the various views up till his time.  The first view that Jerome cites is that of Africanus (160-240), who does not mention a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks, but does, like early gap proponents “definitely views this passage as eschatological and decidedly Messianic.”23  Thus, Africanus fits into the eschatological camp, making him closer to the futurist gap position, and not the historical.

Eusebius (270-340), the father of church history, teaches an historical view, but he places a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks.  Knowles explains:

In regards to the last week, we have some rather distinct views in Eusebius.  We must recall that the last week does not follow immediately upon the sixty-ninth, but comes after the ‘indeterminate space of time’ in which the events of vs. 26 are being fulfilled.  This last week, then, covers a period of seven years that extend from three and one-half years before the crucifixion to three and one-half years after it.24

Knowles speaks of a writer named Hesychius whom Augustine refers to as an opponent of his historical fulfillment view.  “Hesychius has questioned Augustine about the fulfillment of the Seventy Weeks, and seems to be an adherent of the futurist school of interpretation.”25  Thus, it is clear that even in the early fifth century there are still proponents of the eschatological and futurist schools of interpretation of Daniel’s seventieth week.  “We have seen the formation of two definite schools of interpretation. . . .” notes Knowles.  “All the later developments in Christian literature will be found to fit into one of these categories.”26

Conclusion

In one sense it does not matter what others who have come before our current generation think on an issue, since in reality a matter rises or falls upon whether it squares with God’s Word.  However, in another sense it does matter what others have thought down through church history, since if something is taught in the Bible then it may be legitimate to ask why others have not understood a particular teaching.  While there are a number of doctrines that have gone well over a thousand years before members of Christ’s church have come to realize what was there in Scripture all along, the necessary gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel is not one of those late teachings.  Why opponents of a future seventieth week of Daniel want to make matters worse for themselves by saying that we do not have ancient historical precedent is beyond me.  It is obvious that our futurist view was found early and often throughout the early church, and only became scarce when premillennialism was banded from the medieval church as a result of the influence of Augustine and Jerome.  “But the saints shall never possess an earthly kingdom,” declares Jerome, “but only a heavenly.  Away, then, with the fable about a millennium!”27  With Jerome’s banishment of early premillennialism went the literal interpretation of prophecy.  History would have to wait more than a thousand years for the revival of a literal interpretation of Bible prophecy and the literal approach to the seventieth week of Daniel.  Maranatha!
_______________________________

[nChrist]

The Seventy Weeks of Daniel - Part XII - Page 3 of 3
by Thomas Ice

Endnotes

1. Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness:  Obsession of the Modern Church, (Atlanta:  American Vision, 1994), p. 228.

2. Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness:  Obsession of the Modern Church, (Power Springs, GA:  American Vision, 1999), p. 328.

3. Philip Mauro, The Seventy Weeks and the Great Tribulation (Sterling, VA:  Grace Abounding Ministries, 1988 ), p. 74.

4. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Perilous Times:  A Study in Eschatological Evil (Texarkana, AR:  Covenant Media Press, 1999), p. 18.

5. Gentry, Perilous Times, p. 27, f.n. 63.

6. Louis E. Knowles, “The Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks of Daniel in the Early Fathers,” The Westminster Theological Journal (May 1945: Vol. VII), pp. 136-60.

7. Gentry, Perilous Times, p. 27, f.n. 63.

8. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 136.

9. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 137.

10. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 136.

11. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” pp. 138-39.

12. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 139.

13. See the views of Irenaeus in Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter 25.

14. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter 25, Paragraph 4.

15. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 139.

16. Michael Kalafian, The Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks of the Book of Daniel, (Lanham, MD:  University Press of America, 1991), p. 83.

17. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 142.

18. Hippolytus, Fragments from Commentaries, Daniel, Paragraph 22; Treaties on Christ and Antichrist, Paragraphs 61-65; Appendix to the Works of Hippolytus, Paragraphs 21, 25, 36.

19. Hippolytus, Fragments from Commentaries, Daniel, Paragraph 22.

20. Le Roy Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 4 vols, (Washington:  Review and Herald, 1950), vol. I, p. 277.

21. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 141.

22. Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, translated by Gleason L. Archer, Jr. (Grand Rapids:  Baker Book House, 1958 ), p. 95.

23. Kalafian, Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks, p. 80.

24. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 157.

25. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 160.

26. Knowles, “Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” p. 160.

27. Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, p. 81.

(My Note:  This is a very difficult Bible Study, but I highly recommend that you take the time and effort to do it. It will help you understand many other areas of the Bible in a light that will make you smile. This material is outstanding, and I think it represents one of the best studies of its type ever done. If you think that the material is lengthy, you would be wrong. Many lengthy books have been written about the Book of Daniel.

This material is written in a common sense and direct manner that becomes easier to follow as your study progresses. I think that the Author, Thomas Ice, is a genius in his presentation of such difficult material in a manner that average people can take this study and understand it. In short, I think that taking this study will save many years of time and effort in understanding some of the most difficult portions of the Holy Bible.

The conclusions are and will be obvious: There is a SECOND COMING OF CHRIST, and this hasn't happened yet. It's a fact and Promise from GOD that it will most definitely happen. There is much Bible Prophecy yet to be fulfilled, and the SECOND COMING OF CHRIST is just one major example. If you do this study, you will discover many other beautiful Promises of GOD that will be perfectly fulfilled at HIS Appointed Time. That time might be soon.)

[Maryjane]

It is as paul wrote to Timothy in 2nd Timothy, to endure to the end is to reign with Him. Whether we go through the tribulation or not, we shall see Him.  We shall behold the one who gives life eternal.

[Superfundy]

Some who hold to the post-trib Rapture position say that there is not one verse of Scripture which explicitly affirms the Rapture of the Church before the tribulation.



But why need there be?

Because there are SO many that directly affirm a post trib rapture. If pre-trib were true, there would be as direct support for it as there is for the post trib view. But (sadly, I must confess) there is none.

Years ago we printed an article entitled First the Departure, in which we dealt at length with a passage of Scripture which does explicitly affirm that the Rapture will precede the tribulation. In this article we gave conclusive evidence that the words hee apostasia in II Thessalonians 2:3 should have been rendered "the departure" rather than "a falling away" and that the passage thus reads:

"Let no man deceive you by any means; for that day [the day of the Lord]1 shall not come except the departure come first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition."

Except for the fact that Jesus also taught about a falling away in the Olivette discourse, and he spoke of it as one of the signs preceding the AOD, which is also precisely what Paul does. Allowing scripture to interpret scripture, we really have no authority (scriptural or otherwise) to apply a positive meaning to a term that is used in a negative connotation in most all other uses of it.

We are quite taken aback to see how lightly some have disposed of the evidence we advanced for this rendering of II Thessalonians 2:3. We have given Scriptural proof after proof that the word apostasia does not mean departure from the truth, but simply departure, and that the original passage in question certainly does not use the words "a falling away" but rather "the departure".

It is always, in almost every usage of it, used in the context of a spiritual apostacy.

And I prefer to allow scripture to interpret scripture, instead of simply ignoring Jesus teaching regarding the last days, and (without any scriptural authority) claiming it to be "not for the church". It just doesn't wash.

To all this our post-tribulational brethren reply by simply stating authoritatively and dogmatically that the word apostasia means a departure from the truth.

I think that is a mischaracterization of the argument designed to make the post trib view seem cultic or unorthodox.

The fact is, he is referring to the same falling away that Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:10 - 13. Just as he is referring to the same gathering, and day of the Lord in verse 1, as Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:30 - 31, and the same AOD that Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:15. Ignoring the obvious relationship of Pauls words in 1st and 2nd Thess, to Jesus Olivette Doscourse, has always seemed to me to be a kind of "head in the sand" attitude.

And it is quite strange coming from those who are normally quite literal in all their other veiws of scripture.

Were I to insist that the term "raised" here....

Rom 9:17  For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

....has the same connotation as it does here.....

Rom 10:9  That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

You would not doubt (and rightly so) object.

By the method you are using here to support your assertions, I could claim that the scriptures say virtually anything I want them to say. But the bible is a message system, and the only accurate interpretive authority that we can apply to it, is the scriptures themselves.

With so many scriptural evidences supporting Apostolic reference to the Olivette Discourse with regard to Eschatology, I personally do not see how any other view is justified, than that the rapture will be "after the tribulation".

[nChrist]

Hello Superfundy,

I'm happy to agree to disagree, and it doesn't bother me a bit. We have numerous highly detailed debate threads on the forum from all reasonable perspectives. This isn't a critical or salvation question, so having a "pre", "mid", or "post" tribulation opinion about the RAPTURE OF THE CHURCH WHICH IS THE BODY OF CHRIST doesn't cause me any concern at all.

I believe in a Pre-Tribulation RAPTURE, but I no longer argue or debate on this issue.

Love In Christ,
Tom

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 NASB
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words.

1 Corinthians 15:50-58 NASB
Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, "DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory. "O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O  DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?" The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord.

[Soldier4Christ]

Hi Superfundy,

I tend to agree with you on the reasons for seeing a post-trib but also agree with Brother Tom that it is not a salvation issue and not worthy of being argued. What does it matter if the tribulation is pre, mid or post? What does matter is that we are ready for it when that time arrives. It is as Jesus tells us in Mat 24:42-51. He repeats this twice again in Mat 25:1-29, the importance is that we should be ready whenever that time is and until that time arrives we should be about our Father's work bringing as many to Him that we are able to in and through Him.

[Superfundy]

Hi Superfundy,

I tend to agree with you on the reasons for seeing a post-trib but also agree with Brother Tom that it is not a salvation issue and not worthy of being argued. What does it matter if the tribulation is pre, mid or post? What does matter is that we are ready for it when that time arrives. It is as Jesus tells us in Mat 24:42-51. He repeats this twice again in Mat 25:1-29, the importance is that we should be ready whenever that time is and until that time arrives we should be about our Father's work bringing as many to Him that we are able to in and through Him.

Well, the scriptures have been preserved for a reason.

Obviously, this is NOT an issue of salvation or even orthodoxy, but I think there are other legitimate reasons for addressing the reasonings behind the various views. There are good points in virtually every view that isn't cultic or just outragious.

For instance, I don't claim to know for a certainty that there will not be a pre-trib rapture. In fact, I cannot really even guarantee scripturally that we aren't IN the tribulation now (Has anyone read, "The False Prophet"?). But there was some reason for Jesus giving the signs he gave, and I believe it was that the elect would be ready when the time came. The question for me now, is have we seen some of those signs already, or are they all still (as I have always believed) yet future.

The fact is, no one really seems to have any reasoning that has the kind of scriptural certainty that I would really prefer. Then again, niether did most who knew the scriptures at Jesus first advent. They only THOUGHT they did, when in reality, they had completely missed it. I just would like to avoid being in that position, because Jesus seems to say that them that are NOT ready, are them that are decieved, and do not see the signs. Not just them that didn't pick the right doctrine but were saved anyway.

See my point?

But I don't disagree with you, and I certainly hate to see this issue divide believers.

But it often does. 

[Soldier4Christ]

If you are referring to the book "The False Prophet" by Ellis H. Skolfield, no I haven't read it all. I have briefed through parts of it before though.

[GunShowOnTheNet]

¶ And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to [him] for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

¶ And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what [shall be] the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all [these things] must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

All these [are] the beginning of sorrows.

Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come[/u].

¶ When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here [is] Christ, or there; believe [it] not.

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Behold, I have told you before.

Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, [he is] in the secret chambers; believe [it] not.

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

¶ Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

¶ Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer [is] nigh:

So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, [even] at the doors.

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

¶ But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

But as the days of Noe [were], so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Two [women shall be] grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.

Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.

¶ Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?

Blessed [is] that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.

Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.

But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;

And shall begin to smite [his] fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;

The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for [him], and in an hour that he is not aware of,

And shall cut him asunder, and appoint [him] his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
 
- Matthew 24:1-51

[nChrist]

Hello GunShowOnTheNet,

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with the Bible Quote, so I'll just say that we need to use caution in not mixing Israel with the CHURCH WHICH IS THE BODY OF CHRIST.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable GIFT, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour Forever!